Washington, Feb 27, (V7N) – The newly formed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), led by tech billionaire Elon Musk, recently claimed it saved nearly $900 million by cutting contracts at the U.S. Department of Education. However, a new analysis suggests that the reported savings were significantly exaggerated, with experts from both left-leaning and right-leaning think tanks revealing discrepancies in the calculations.
 
DOGE initially reported a savings of $881 million after terminating 89 contracts at the Education Department’s research arm. However, an investigation by New America, a progressive think tank, and the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), a conservative organization, found the actual savings to be much lower. According to New America’s findings, the value of the canceled contracts was closer to $676 million, with many of the cuts already involving funds that had already been allocated. This means that unfinished studies, which had already cost taxpayers around $400 million, would now have to go through a costly rebidding process.
 
New America’s research revealed that the real savings from the cuts were closer to $278 million after accounting for the money already spent. The team from New America also pointed out that canceling research projects, particularly those in progress, would leave studies unfinished and wasted, which would ultimately cost more to restart.
 
Experts, such as Antoinette Flores, director of higher education accountability at New America, criticized DOGE for not properly considering the long-term impacts of its cuts, which could leave the Education Department and other stakeholders in the dark on critical education data. Margaret Spellings, a former Education Department official, also expressed concerns over the decision, stating that without these studies, the country would be "flying blind" in terms of understanding U.S. education.
 
Despite the pushback, the Education Department’s spokesperson referred questions about the discrepancies to DOGE, while the White House defended the cuts, clarifying that DOGE's calculations included both "ceiling" and "savings" values. However, critics argue that the flawed math and the disruption of vital research cast doubt on DOGE's overall approach to efficiency and government reform.
 
In the midst of these findings, former education officials and experts continue to call for better planning and more thoughtful decision-making when it comes to educational research and data collection, stressing the importance of transparent and accountable methods for improving U.S. schools.
 
END/WD/SMA/